On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:03 PM, "Rik Cabanier" <caban...@gmail.com<mailto:caban...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Darin Adler <da...@apple.com<mailto:da...@apple.com>> wrote: On Sep 22, 2012, at 9:21 PM, Elliott Sprehn <espr...@chromium.org<mailto:espr...@chromium.org>> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Dirk Schulze > <dschu...@adobe.com<mailto:dschu...@adobe.com>> wrote: > >> I would like to ask if there are objections to implement the canvas Path >> object. > > Do we have metrics on how often people already have things named Path? All > other canvas objects have a prefix like CanvasGradient and CanvasPattern, > this thing seems inconsistent and more likely to break existing pages. Dirk, given the fact that you quite logically referred to this as “the canvas Path object” when mentioning it to us, and the fact that both CanvasGradient and CanvasPattern objects exist, CanvasPath sure does seem like a nice name for this. Someone should make that suggestion on the WebApps mailing list! I am interested in the feature, not the name. I am fine with naming it CanvasPath. Remember that Path is not limited to Canvas, other then for instance SVGPathElement. I just want to avoid that people come to the impression that this can just be used for Canvas. A difference though is that the path object doesn't have to be associated with a canvas. It is/will be useful with other features such as SVG as well. I feel uneasy with the generic name too; maybe a DOM/HTML/JS prefix is better. DOM and HTML will lead to the same wrong conclusions IMO. And JS seems unusual as prefix. Greetings Dirk
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
